AHMEDABAD: Twenty-seven of 40
judges
, whose promotion to
district judge
cadre was cancelled at the instance of the
Supreme Court
last year over the promotion on ‘merit-cum-seniority’ principle, have approached the Gujarat high court with their quandary about taking the promotion exam this time.
According to the case details, 68 judicial officers were promoted last year in the 65% promotion quota on the principle of merit-cum-seniority. The senior-most judges among those who cross the cut-off mark in a multiple-choice question test are promoted to the post of district judge. The two other modes of promotion are the 25% quota for direct recruitment from the bar and the 10% quota for merit.
After 68 judicial officers were promoted and posted in different courts, two judges, who scored more marks than others but were not promoted because they were junior to the others, challenged the system of ‘merit-cum-seniority’ before the apex court. In an interim order, the SC stayed the promotions, and the HC on its administrative side relegated 40 judges to their original cadre because they had scored less marks than the two petitioner judges.
While the issue of the validity of promotion based on merit-cum-seniority is pending before the SC, some of the judges relegated have filed a petition. Their counsels, Prakash Jani and Ankit Shah, submitted that an examination for promotion in the 10% quota on merit is scheduled for February 25. The lawyers asked what would happen if the judicial officers clear the
promotion test
this year and also win their legal battle in the apex court. If they succeed on both fronts, should their promotion be treated as from 2023 or 2024? This was one of the questions they raised before the HC.
The lawyers also submitted that if these judicial officers do not clear the exam for promotion in 2024, their failure should not be cited as an argument for their incompetence in the case filed by their junior in the SC.
After hearing this, the bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice sought a response from the HC’s administrative side and posted a further hearing for February 27.
English (US) ·